NEW YORK Probably to no one's surprise, Jon Stewart, host of Comedy Central's "Daily Show," hailed the performance of his stablemate Stephen Colbert at Saturday night's White House Correspondents dinner. Colbert's lampooning of the president and the press has generated a good deal of praise and criticism.

"It was balls-alicious," Stewart said. "Apparently he was under the impression that they'd hired him to do what he does every night on television"--that is, make fun of conservatives, public officials and the press in the guise of an O'Reillyesque talk show host.

"We've never been prouder of him, but HOLY ----," Stewart added.

He also described the annual dinner as "where the President and the press corps consummate their loveless marriage."

- snip -

Colbert made fun of his mixed reception at the dinner, re-running the tape of one of his jokes with the audience barely reacting. He described this as "very respectful silence," and said that actually the crowd loved him. "They practically carried me out on their shoulders," he said, "even though I wasn't ready to go."

55. Although I couldn't watch the rerun this AM of Colbert, I did catch TDS

which I missed the start and end of last night. Jon Stewart and his audience's reception of Stephen was equally as spectacular! My guess is that those who didn't see it on c-span have been and are seeing it on the net. At a bit torrent server it's been downloaded over 77,000 times!

last night. That said, the responses to E&P's article on Stephen Colbert's speech are very interesting. To me this one nails it.

I think one of the problems for Bush is that he is so accustomed to being slobbered over that he may never have heard the truth about himself. And, after all, what did Stephen Colbert say that wasn't based on reality? When telling a president the truth offends the White House press corps, we are is serious trouble.Lois Erwin

What a sloppy and inaccurate use of a word in a headline. No wonder the media is held in such disregard, even when they're "on our side." Shame on that one for being so stupid and wrong.

Stewart was beaming and throwing plaudits, and if Colbert didn't rise to the occasion, and then transcend it. He (Colbert) gets better and better, and I think he's about to become a major force in American commentary, not just comedy.

His interview with Morley Safer on "Sixty Minutes" showcased a really nice, smart, straightforward, direct, hardworking, respectful, and very, very, very smart and disciplined man who is defined in many ways by his family, his family's tragedies, and his own personal life, about which he quite appropriately said very little. He came across as a really first-rate actor, because he was nothing like the Colbert Report buffoon, which just showed how immensely talented he is.

Stewart didn't "defend." Colbert's performance needed no defense.

The people who need defending are the ones who were frightened and upset by what Colbert did on Saturday night, and they are the ones who should be ashamed of themselves, who should have listened carefully to what he said and learned from him, who are in as many ways as culpable as Fuckface And His Band Of Illegal Squatter Thugs In The Oval Office for the horrible things that have happened to our country (and what we've done out there in the world) since they stole the first election.

I wouldn't have missed it for the world, and I hope the video of Colbert's routine becomes one of those things that people watch every day, that gets shown on special occasions (like when the Democrats take the Congress and then the White House), and I hope Stephen Colbert is invited to perform at the new Democratic Presidential Inaugural in January, 2009.

What a bunch of thinskinned, humorless, self-important weenies are the "journalists" who "cover" the White House. Only Helen Thomas came across as a genuinely dedicated writer who understands her job. And they ignored her, too, didn't they?

Weenies.

Bravissimo, Stephen Colbert. You're a big star in this OldLeftieLawyer's world, and you always will be. Courage and truthiness count.

The people who need defending are the ones who were frightened and upset by what Colbert did on Saturday night...

The only people who weren't laughing in that venue, or in the television audience, were:

--The GOP shills, toadies, politicians and their staffers, who make their bread and butter from the monkey on the stage.

--The reporters, some of whom have chugged the KoolAid, and others, who, if seen roaring with glee, would be "shut out" by that vindictive chimp and his cohorts.

--The 20 percenters, who will not be moved because it's all about them--they can't ever admit that they made a mistake in choosing their leader, they threw their cash and heart down a well filled with fetid turds, and like an abused child, will try to smooth things out, overcompensate, and not make waves, no matter how much their gut is churning inside.

Why do I think that Valerie Plame and Joe Wilson thought it was a good night out, rubber chicken notwithstanding?

... and asked, "Who is this Stephen Colbert guy? Have you heard of him? He sounds really cool!" My landlord doesn't watch much TV, except for a couple of news and analysis shows. He was impressed by Colbert's decency and intelligence during the interview -- and he's definitely not moved by TV personalities, or the latest celebrity fad.

Fortunately, I was able to tell him that Stephen Colbert's show is now available in Canada, on a non-cable channel too.

... for a friend who is working in the Arctic and has no cable access. So what I'll do, prior to shipping the next set of tapes, is to lend them to my landlord so he can sample them (last night's shows would be a nice start!).

If the dumbed down, complicit or compliant corporate media can't understand irony it's their own fault. If they've been so cowed by Administration bullies, it's their own fault. They've been mailing it in for the last five years. Earning a living as opposed to making a living is hard work. Colbert called out all of them and their response is so defensive it's transparent. Essentially, he told them to get real jobs. For the blank slates who see only black and white, perhaps Fux News is in order. As for the reality based community, and those with IQs above moran, Colbert hit the target. Colbert's performance has their panties in a bunch almost as much as a stained dress. And maybe they're resentful because they have to give Bush blowjobs to keep the paychecks coming in while Colbert does it with talent and effort. The lurch to the right hasn't worked for the New York Times or CNN. In the Times case they failed to take into account Bushbots don't read. So much for expanding the base, as normal readers canceled subscriptions. CNN tried to recoup the audience share lost to Fux News. Those who went to Fux aren't returning to CNN anytime soon as they refer to CNN as the Clinton or Communist News Network. CNN lost even more viewers for their efforts. There are only so many rabid reich wing butt plugs to go around, and they are mostly in the lower income strata, thus making them less valuable to advertisers. Speaking of advertisers: check out who sponsors the drug addled Limbaugh and you get a good idea of who's listening .

"Best of all, I got to meet my main man, President Bush," he said, and even had a chance to shake his hand. "He has very soft hands," Colbert revealed, "which was surprising. He must wear gloves when he is clearing brush."

on Hardball (when Tweety asked "Why was Colbert so bad?") that "you've got to know the room" and that the rule in the past has been to "scorch, not burn" and that "the person with the softer touch usually wins."

I say FUCK HIM. What does he know about entertaining an audience of any size? "You've got to know the room?" When did you become an entertainment reporter, Mike? Better yet, tell me how many times have you performed comedy?

Colbert knew his "audience" very well. It was not just "the room." It was us. The 68% (or more) who are fed up with GWB and the press. I suspect that we tuned into C-Span in record numbers on Saturday night precisely because of Colbert's presence. I would be surprised if it wasn't the most-viewed White House Correspondent's Dinner ever.

We were very entertained, Mike.

Tweety made the final pronuncement, suggesting that Colbert's speech was inappropriate because Bush is the President of the United States, "not just a politician."

So, is it inappropriate to satirize the POTUS, Chris, or is it just inappropriate to do it in his presence? Or does Matthews think Colbert should have been kinder & gentler, sticking to "softer" jokes about how Bush mangles words and ignoring the fact that he is mangling the country?

And he must have known he wouldn't get it. The bigger he 'bombed' at the event, the better his reception would be in the big world. That Allen quote just emphasizes the difference between Colbert and the lapdogs: Allen can't imagine why anyone would walk into that event with any goal other than making everyone in the room happy. Because he doesn't get why a happy press, at this time in American history, is a very dangerous thing.

an audience who had never heard his name before. Co-workers are showing the video on the internet. Students are emailing the video...soldiers in Iraq are watching.It's out there.The main stream media doesn't have a clue. They're dinosaurs and the ice age is here.

Much like Andy Kaufman who often made the audience part of the act without them actually getting it. The press corps were duped into being part of his show to the rest of the world. That is why Colbert is a comic genius.

It sounds like he couldn't be more proud. In order for Stewart to "defend" Colbert, wouldn't there need to be reporting of Colbert to be defended? It's been a blackout. It looks like Stewart is PROUD of Colbert, not defending him.

and the whole Affair Colbert proves it.They're either ignoring it and (morning shows) repeatedly showing the "funny" two-Bush schtick. Gag. Or they're getting very solemn and tut tutting how "inappropriate" Colbert's remarks were. Meanwhile, the internet is going crazy with downloads of Colbert's speech. I've received half a dozen links from friends. And my co-workers were so busy watching the clips on the net yesterday, little work was done.The MSM is becoming more anachronistic with their head in the sand behavior.Colbert is inappropriate? But 24-7 "white girl missing" is appropriate? The Duke rape story trumping Darfur is "appropriate"? Ignoring this administration's continued lying for war is "appropriate?"Not only does the emporeror have no clothes, but Affair Colbert proves neither does the media.They're flat out naked on this one.And that includes you, my dear Keith Olberman. Put some clothes on and get in touch with your spine.

Colbert then followed Stewart, on his own show, "The Colbert Report," describing the "honor of appearing" at the big dinner. He said the room was full of "power players," so he "fit right in."

"Best of all, I got to meet my main man, President Bush," he said, and even had a chance to shake his hand. "He has very soft hands," Colbert revealed, "which was surprising. He must wear gloves when he is clearing brush."

Colbert made fun of his mixed reception at the dinner, re-running the tape of one of his jokes with the audience barely reacting. He described this as "very respectful silence," and said that actually the crowd loved him.

"They practically carried me out on their shoulders," he said, "even though I wasn't ready to go."

I just watched the evening replay of last nights show. First, Jon Stewart was terrific opening his show with appreciation for the Man - Colbert.Then, Colbert's audience just blew it out - had to be a standing O for much longer than usual.Isn't it completely ironic that comedians - comedians! - are now the ones with the courage to call out the criminals. The press have been exposed as the garbage they have become.

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion
board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules
page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the
opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent
the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.